Many Christians have been warning for years that the radical homosexual activist lobby is made up of Christian-hating fascists who are in rebellion against both God and nature, who are hell-bent on criminalizing Christianity and pushing to the fringes anyone who publicly acknowledges natural human sexuality and the age-old, immutable institution of legitimate marriage as created by God.
Sadly, many people, even many Christians, think that I and others are using hyperbole when we refer to this sexual anarchist "LGBT" movement as "homofascist" or the "Gaystapo." I hope you'll think again. It's time to wake up and smell the impending anti-Christian persecution. It's fully at hand.
BarbWire contributor Laurie Higgins, commenting on the Washington Examiner story below, summed it up well in an email tonight: more >>
One of our cherished rights in this country is our First Amendment guarantee of free speech. Throughout our history, Americans have been allowed to speak their mind no matter how controversial the topic. Unfortunately, over time, this right has been steadily diminishing and the forces of censorship are winning.
For example, on college campuses today, liberal speakers are welcomed, while conservatives are ignored and labeled too reactionary for young audiences.
In the corporate world, beliefs in traditional marriage are considered homophobic and antiquated. In June of 2012, Dan Cathy, the Chief Operating Officer of Chick-fil-A, expressed support for traditional marriage in an interview. This led to boycotts and protests from gay rights activists. Even though a counter protest was launched in support of the chain, the damage had been done. Eventually, the restaurant executives decided to refrain from commenting on the marriage issue and their charitable foundation stopped giving financial support to pro-traditional marriage organizations. In effect, the protests silenced this corporation and their executives. more >>
The head of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield, Ili., has expressed his support for a priest who has refused to give Holy Communion to Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ili.).
Bishop Thomas J. Paprocki stated in an email written to a pro-life activist that he supported Monsignor Kevin Vann, pastor at Blessed Sacrament Church.
"Senator Durbin was informed several years ago by his pastor at Blessed Sacrament Parish here in Springfield that he was not permitted to receive Holy Communion per canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law," wrote Paprocki. more >>
Are Christian homeschoolers more tolerant than their public and privately schooled peers?
A recent study from Albert Cheng, a distinguished doctoral fellow at the University of Arkansas, suggests that learning at home might increase a Christian's propensity to extend civil rights to those with whom they personally disagree.
In a study released in March, Cheng sampled 304 students out of the approximately 4,000 undergraduates at Biola University, a private Christian college in La Mirada, Calif. more >>
WASHINGTON — Immigration reform is unlikely to get passed this year in the U.S. House, Rep. James Lankford (R-Okla.) told The Christian Post this week. He also spoke about his efforts to combat human trafficking.
"I don't anticipate taking up anything on immigration before we get to the [November] election," Lankford said.
Last year, the House Judiciary Committee developed four bills addressing immigration. Then in January, House Republican leaders released a document Standards for Immigration Reform that included a path to legal status for current unauthorized immigrants. more >>
On Thursday, Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant signed S.B. 2681, the Mississippi Religious Freedom Restoration Act, into law, bringing the state into line with federal law on the issue of religious freedom. To their credit, Mississippi's elected officials read the bill's text and did not yield to egregious misrepresentations of what is a fair and reasonable religious liberty measure. Why anyone thinks this bill is a bad thing is tough to know. Why this should be so controversial is even more perplexing.
The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: "Congress shall make no law … prohibiting the free exercise" of religion. The aim of the Free Exercise Clause is relatively clear from its text – to protect individuals wishing to freely exercise their faith from being restricting in doing so by the government. Historically, its interpretation by the U.S. Supreme Court has been less clear.
In Sherbert v. Verner (1963), and Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), the Supreme Court explained that before the government could infringe on and burden religious exercise, it had to show that its burdensome regulations were advancing a compelling government interest, and were the least restrictive means to advance this interest. This requirement is known as "strict scrutiny," which is the toughest standard for the government to meet when it seeks to infringe on constitutional rights. Yet in its 1990 decision Employment Division v. Smith, the Supreme Court significantly restricted free exercise rights, holding that laws infringing on religious exercise did not violate the First Amendment as long as they were neutral and generally applicable. more >>